I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Rodney Local Board will be held on:

 

Date:                      

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Monday, 12 May 2014

1.00pm

Council Chamber
Orewa Service Centre
50 Centreway Road
Orewa

 

Rodney Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Brenda Steele

 

Deputy Chairperson

Steven Garner

 

Members

James Colville

 

 

Warren Flaunty, QSM

 

 

Thomas Grace

 

 

Beth Houlbrooke

 

 

John McLean

 

 

Phelan Pirrie

 

 

Greg Sayers

 

 

(Quorum 5 members)

 

 

 

Raewyn Morrison

Local Board Democracy Advisor

 

7 May 2014

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 427 3399

Email: raewyn.morrison@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                        PAGE

1          Welcome                                                                                                                         5

2          Apologies                                                                                                                        5

3          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   5

4          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               5

5          Leave of Absence                                                                                                          5

6          Acknowledgements                                                                                                       5

7          Petitions                                                                                                                          5

8          Deputations                                                                                                                    5

8.1     Kumeu Arts Centre                                                                                              5

8.2     North West District Business Association                                                       6

8.3     Harbour Sport                                                                                                       6

8.4     Big Nui Music Event - Wainui School                                                                6

8.5     Sandspit SOS Inc.                                                                                                7

8.6     The Coatesville Plan                                                                                            7

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  7

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                7

11        Notices of Motion                                                                                                          8

12        Ward Councillor Update                                                                                               9

13        Review of dog access in the Rodney Local Board area

This report was not available when the agenda was compiled. The report will be included in a supplementary agenda or be tabled on the day.

 

14        Mahurangi River Dredging Update                                                                            11

15        Helensville Plunket                                                                                                      59

16        Allocation of Funding for Youth Skills and Employment                                       67

17        Puhoi Volunteer Rural Fire Station Approval to Lease over Puhoi Pioneers Memorial Park (52 Ahuroa Road, Puhoi)                                                                                            77

18        Gateways Rodney - construction of gateway features                                           99

19        Quarterly Performance report for quarter ended March 2014                             107

20        Bylaw review programme update - April 2014                                                       163

21        Local Board Capital Transport Fund                                                                      181

22        Rodney Local Board Final Feedback on the Local Boards Funding Policy       185

23        Rodney and Hibiscus Coast Subdivision Local Board Funding Subcommittee 189

24        Communications and Engagement Portfolio                                                         195

25        Urgent Decision of Local Board: Transport Capital Funding                              197

26        Deputation/Public Forum Update                                                                            203

27        Rodney Local Board Workshop Records                                                               207  

28        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

 

 


1          Welcome

 

2          Apologies

 

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

 

3          Declaration of Interest

 

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.

 

4          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Rodney Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Monday, 14 April 2014, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

 

 

5          Leave of Absence

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.

 

6          Acknowledgements

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for acknowledgements had been received.

 

7          Petitions

 

At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.

 

8          Deputations

 

8.1       Kumeu Arts Centre

Purpose

1.       Representatives of the Kumeu Arts Centre will be in attendance to give the Rodney Local Board an update on their business and strategic plan for 2014.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a)      thank the representatives from Kumeu Arts Centre for their presentation on their business and strategic plan for 2014.

 

 

 

8.2       North West District Business Association

Purpose

1.       Representatives from the North West District Business Association will be in attendance to give an update on their recent successful Business Improvement District (BID) ballot. The representatives have indicated that they wish to request funding so that a new association executive can start the recruitment process for a manager and complete the branding process.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a)      thank the representatives from the North West District Business Association for their presentation on their recent successful Business Improvement District (BID) ballot.

 

 

 

8.3       Harbour Sport

Purpose

1.       Kevin O’Leary, Sport Capability Advisor from Harbour Sport will be in attendance to give the Rodney Local Board an update on the activities of Harbour Sport in the Rodney area.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a)      thank Kevin O’Leary, Sport Capability Manager from Harbour Sport for his presentation on the activities of Harbour Sport in the Rodney Local Board area.

 

 

 

8.4       Big Nui Music Event - Wainui School

Purpose

1.       Andy Hamilton and Brent Robinson will be in attendance to address the Rodney Local Board on the recent Bug Nui Music Event, a fund raising event for Wainui School. Mr Hamilton and Mr Robinson will speak about the impact the cost of the resource consent has had on the level of funds raised.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a)      thank Andy Hamilton and Brent Robinson for their presentation on the Big Nui Music fund raising event for Wainui School.

 

 

 

8.5       Sandspit SOS Inc.

Purpose

1.       Representatives from Sandspit SOS Inc. will be in attendance to address the Rodney Local Board on the possibility of reallocation of Environmental Initiative Funding for revegetation activities on salt march in the Sandspit Reserve. The group will also discuss community restoration projects.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a)      thank the representatives from Sandspit SOS Inc. on their presentation regarding various environmental initiatives in the Sandspit area.

 

 

 

8.6       The Coatesville Plan

Purpose

1.       Representatives from the Coatesville Residents and Ratepayers Association will be in attendance to address the Rodney Local Board on their Coatesville Plan which received funding from the local board. The document outlines how Coatesville will interact with Riverhead, Albany and its other neighbours.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a)      thank the representatives from Coatesville Residents and Ratepayers Association for their presentation of the Coatesville Plan.

 

 

 

9          Public Forum

 

A period of time (approximately 30 minutes) is set aside for members of the public to address the meeting on matters within its delegated authority. A maximum of 3 minutes per item is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for public forum had been received.

 

10        Extraordinary Business

 

Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

 

“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-

 

(a)        The local authority by resolution so decides; and

 

(b)        The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-

 

(i)         The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and

 

(ii)        The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”

 

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

 

“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-

 

(a)        That item may be discussed at that meeting if-

 

(i)         That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and

 

(ii)        the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but

 

(b)        no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”

 

11        Notices of Motion

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for notices of motion had been received.

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 

Ward Councillor Update

 

File No.: CP2014/08803

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The Rodney Local Board allocates a period of time for the Ward Councillor, Cr Penny Webster, to update them on the activities of the governing body.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a)      thank Cr Webster for her update to the Rodney Local Board on the activities of the governing body.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatories

Authors

Raewyn Morrison - Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 

Mahurangi River Dredging Update

 

File No.: CP2014/07785

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To present the findings of two recently completed reports on the Mahurangi River Dredging project (as commissioned by Local and Sports Parks), and to recommend further actions.

Executive summary

2.       Rodney Local Board allocated $30,990 budget in 2012/13 to navigational dredging of the Mahurangi River. The origin of this funding related to a Rodney District Council (RDC) legacy project referenced in the Long Term Council Community Plan.  Officers recommended the budget be used to complete further investigations to clarify the project scope and viability.  

3.       Two external reports were commissioned following a review of legacy information to accurately define options for capital dredging (volumes) and sedimentation processes (maintenance requirements).

4.       Detailed investigations relating to dredge spoil disposal (marine or land) are outstanding and still need to be completed to enable comprehensive assessments. Regional and district plan consents will be required for any dredging and disposal works, the scope of which has not yet been determined.    

5.       Local board support of a community trust established to complete outstanding investigations, detailed design and required planning assessments (as the project owner) is recommended.

6.       This report recommends support for a community led targeted dredging project as proposed by the local community trust.

 

Recommendations

That the Rodney Local Board:

a)      receives the Hutchinson’s Dredging Volume Assessment report dated March 2014 and the eCoast Limited Upper Mahurangi Sedimentation report dated July 2012, as attached to the agenda report.

b)      provides continued support in principle for a community led ‘targeted dredging’ project as promoted by the local community trust.

c)      support the requirement for outstanding investigations related to dredge spoil disposal via the provision of seed funding to the local community trust.

d)      makes available all relevant Auckland Council reports and legacy information to assist the local community trust with outstanding investigations, detailed design and resource consent applications.

e)      requests technical support be made available via the local board to assist the local community trust with progression of the above.  

 

Comments

7.       Currently, navigation of the Mahurangi River is limited to approximately 2.5 hours either side of high tide with access over the river mouth delta providing the main control. Historical dredging of the area around the township wharf and river is known to have been undertaken since the early 1900s.

8.       The Auckland Council harbour master is responsible for navigation and safety within the region. Council has installed 32 navigational aids along the length of the Mahurangi River to assist mariners with safe passage. The harbour master has acknowledged the limitations associated with tidal access of the Mahurangi River, but has confirmed that this is acceptable (with specific reference to navigation and safety), when compared to other similar tidally restricted waterways within the region. The provision of navigation markers and education of mariners using the Mahurangi River is considered to further mitigate any safety risk which may be present.

9.       Operators of the Jane Gifford (an historical restored scow regularly operating out of Warkworth with a draft of ~0.76m) report that they are restricted to an hour and a half either side of high tide to navigate the river. The main points of restriction appear to be around the town basin and near the river mouth around Dawson’s Creek, with localised points along the river where fallen trees, refuse, bank encroachment and rock mounds further impact upon access and navigation.

10.     The project as initially defined considers dredging approximately 6.2km of the Mahurangi River, from the Warkworth town centre wharves to the ‘river mouth’ approximately adjacent to Dawson’s Creek. Initial project scoping to ‘improve navigation’ had considered dredging a channel 15m wide to a depth of 1.5m below Mean Low Water Spring (MLWS) yielding in excess of 87,000m3 of spoil material (Attachment A).

11.     Local community representatives and user groups have confirmed continued support for a wider project which includes the following provisions:

·    Continued dredging around and downstream from the Warkworth wharves.

·    Consideration and confirmation of the need for capital works dredging around the seaward margin of the Mahurangi River (approximately at Dawson’s Creek).

·    Undertaking clearance of areas that pose potential navigation hazards, such as fallen trees, refuse, rock mounds and slips (via targeted dredging).

·    Ongoing maintenance dredging in response to any additional influxes of sediment to provide for an improved navigable waterway.

·    Dredging operations to be progressed via a barge (or tug) mounted excavator, with consideration of possible options and sites for land based dredge spoil disposal.

 

12.     Coastal Management Services in Infrastructure and Environmental Services and Local and Sports Parks presented a report to the local board in May 2013 detailing the history of the Mahurangi Dredging proposal. Confirmation was provided that the sequence of legacy reports commissioned made it difficult to determine project scope and community or council support. Additionally investigations omitted any reference to who would assume enduring project ownership and the associated risk and liability. A recommendation to commission two further reports to help refine the parameters and scope of any potential project was supported and funded by the local board.

13.     The report by Hutchinsons Consultants Ltd (Attachment A) presents the quantities of dredged material for various channel depths. Detailed cross sections of the current river depths are also provided. This information is intended to assist with the development and design of any potential project, such as a targeted dredging programme.

14.     The report by eCoast Ltd (Attachment B) details sediment inputs into the Mahurangi system following storm events. It is estimated that approximately 14,000 tons for a 10 year event and 38,000 tons for a 50 year event is deposited into the system. It is noted due to the variance in any natural system this is likely to fluctuate with different events both in quantity and patterns of deposition. This information is intended to assist with confirming the ongoing maintenance requirements of any potential project.

15.     Potential deposition sites for any dredge spoil material still require investigation. It is acknowledged that disposal of spoil is a major component when considering the viability of any potential project, and the subsequent resource consent process.

16.     Regional and District Plan consents will be required for any dredging and disposal works, the scope of which has not yet been determined. The exact consenting requirements will be dependent upon the specific details and scope of any final proposal. However, from the information as reviewed, it is suggested that resource consents may be required for the respective activities below:

Dredging: Consents for capital works and maintenance dredging may be required under the Unitary Plan (operational sections), Auckland Council Regional Plan (Coastal) (ACRP(C)) and the Auckland Council Regional Plan (Air, Land and Water) (ACRP(ALW)). The activity status of any potential application will depend upon the exact nature of the proposal (i.e. where and how much material is to be dredged, specifying a preferred methodology).

Reclamation: Should a disposal site in the Coastal Marine Area (CMA) or on the upper river banks be considered then consents for reclamation would need to be applied for under the Unitary Plan (operational sections), ACRP(C), ACRP (ALW) or the Auckland Council District Plan (Rodney Section) (ACDP (RS)). The activity status and nature of the consents would be contingent upon the particulars and design detail of any proposed reclamation. It is noted that the areas of CMA considered within the reports included areas classified as Coastal Protection Area 1, making reclamation a prohibited activity. 

Land Based Disposal: Should a dredge spoil disposal site on land be considered, then consents would need to be applied for under the Unitary Plan (operational sections), ACDP (RS). The activity status and nature of the consents would be contingent upon the particulars of any proposed disposal including disposal methodology, residence time and related potential discharges.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

17.     The local board has a number of potential roles within the wider scope of this project including facilitation, sponsorship and project management. This needs to be balanced against Auckland Council’s ability to provide support to a project where it could potentially be both an applicant and a regulator.   

18.     Council is responsible for small scale dredging adjacent to the Warkworth wharf structure and vessel berths (to assist with public use and access) and this is intended to continue. 

19.     The community desire for additional dredging needs to be balanced against the existing provision for safe public navigation and access as confirmed via the Harbourmasters office of Auckland Council.

20.     Large scale dredging and the related requirements for enduring maintenance are not currently considered to be a core function of Auckland Council.

21.     A partnership between the local board and any respective community group to undertake an activity such as large scale dredging is seen as high risk. For example should Auckland Council be the holders of resource consents, any responsibility for enduring maintenance and adherence to associated conditions and compliance would default to Auckland Council.

22.     It is understood that a trust has been established by the local community in order to progress detailed design and ultimately to conduct the capital and maintenance dredging. It is recommended that the local board provide support to the trust in respect of completing outstanding investigations, project refinement and required resource consent applications. Support could range from the provision of funding to complete dredge spoil disposal investigations, the offer of assistance and technical support via council officers and provision of the current body of background information, reports and research to assist with the above.

Maori impact statement

23.     Detailed investigations in respect of Tangata Whenua values have not been completed within the scope of this report, but will need to be included as a component of more detailed investigations, including potential and related effects. 

24.     It should be noted that the Warkworth River and wider harbour environs have significant value to Tangata Whenua as a transportation route and a valued area for food collection. It is understood the Iwi and Hapū that have ancestral or historical connections of interest to the Mahurangi area are:

·    Te Kawerau a Maki

·    Ngāti Whātua o Ōrākei

·    Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara

·    Ngāti Manuhiri

·    Ngāti Paoa

 

Another ancestral group claiming 'ahi ka' and Tangata Whenua status of the Mahurangi are Te Uri o Maki.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Hutchinsons Dredging Volume Assessment Report

15

bView

eCoast Limited Upper Mahurangi Sedimentation Report

31

     

Signatories

Authors

Paul Klinac – Coastal Management Services Team Manager

Authorisers

John Dragicevich - Manager Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 











Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 




























Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 

Helensville Plunket

 

File No.: CP2014/08298

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To advise the Rodney Local Board of water penetration issues at the Helensville Plunket building and seek a decision as to the preferred response.

Executive summary

2.       The Helensville Plunket is part of the Helensville community complex and is attached to the Helensville Library.  During the course of work to remediate water tightness issues at this complex, additional areas of water ingress into the Plunket building from the roof were identified. Options to respond to these issues include;

·    undertaking repairs to the roof and wall of the existing building and installation of new windows where it joins the Library.

·    demolition and removal of the building from the site and remediation of the area with paving.

3.       The budget to reconstruct the building has been estimated to cost $82,000.  The current 2013/2014 Rodney Community Facility Local Board renewal budget has an allowance of $16,000 to address the water ingress issues.  This is not adequate to enable any reconstruction of the building to occur and the local board would need to allocate a further $74,800 from its 2013/2014 renewal budget for this solution.  The cost of demolishing the existing building and remediating the area has been estimated to cost $70,000.  Should the local board decide on this option extra budget will also need to be approved.

 

Recommendations

That the Rodney Local Board:

 

a)      approves the reconstruction option identified in attachment A to the agenda report for the Helensville Plunket building to address roof and water ingress issues through construction of a new sloping roof and reconstruction of the existing building fabric.

b)      approves the allocation of an extra $74,800 from the local boards 2013/2014 facilities renewal budget towards this project.

 

 

Comments

4.       The Helensville Plunket is part of the Helensville community complex and is attached to the Helensville Library.  As part of the external works project to remediate weather tightness issues at this community complex, the retaining wall alongside the Plunket building was waterproofed and channeling installed to deal with ground water issues.  During the course of these works additional areas of water ingress into the Plunket building from the roof were identified.  Water was found to be “ponding” in the roof’s internal guttering and then tracking back under the existing roof membrane causing problems.  The butynol roof was found to be poorly installed and not having the required lapping to prevent water seepage.  Being a flat roof with no fall, the water sits on the roof instead of flowing easily away.  The roof is not compliant with the current regulations and the building does not have a building compliance certificate.

5.       The water ingress problem was identified and in the 2013/2014 renewal program and a budget of $16,000 allocated in the belief that repairs to the roof membrane would address the water ingress issues.  Whilst options are being considered, the water ingress is being prevented with a plastic tarpaulin attached to the library roof that looks unsightly and cuts down light to the library.  It is important that a decision is made before winter on whether to undertake repairs to this building and provide the Plunket with some certainty regarding its future at this site. 

6.       The preferred solution identified to address the water ingress issues is to rebuild the roof and create fall for the water to run off. This solution will require the installation of smaller windows where the Plunket building attaches to the library.  A proposed plan is attached that has been costed by a quantity surveyor (Attachment A).  This solution would enable the building to become compliant.

7.       The construction and design costs for this solution have been identified as being $76,000, which includes a contingency allowance of $8,000.  Obtaining building consent and project management costs will add another $6,000 to the project making the total project cost $82,000.  The current budget available in the Rodney Community Facilities renewal budget is $16,000 less expenditure of $7,200 on the project to date.  Should the local board decide on this solution a further $74,800 would need to be allocated from its 2013/2014 renewal budget.  This design option has been discussed with the Library and they are supportive of the approach being taken to address the Plunket building issues.

8.       The other options available to the local board would be to demolish the Plunket building.  This is problematic as the current Plunket floor level is higher than the library exterior and will require breaking the Plunket concrete floor so a new surface channel can be installed.

9.       Demolition option 1 is to remove the building except for block work and concrete slab, install a nib and cavity wall to library and a new surface channel.  This is estimated to cost $55,000. Demolition option 2 is to demolish the Plunket building including the concrete slab, repave the area and reclad library wall at an estimated cost of $70,000.  The demolition cannot be funded from the local board’s renewal budget and another source of funding would be required if this approach was decided. Currently there are no other accommodation options available should Plunket have to vacate this building.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

10.     This report seeks the views of the local board and how it wants to address the issues identified at the Helensville Plunket building.

Maori impact statement

11.     The nature of the issue being reported does not trigger any areas of significance for Maori.

Implementation

12.     It is important that a decision is made before winter on whether to undertake repairs to this building and provide the Plunket with some certainty regarding its future at this site.  Plunket advises that this building is used on a daily basis and they would like to continue to operate from it into the future.  If the decision made is to reconstruct the building then the Plunket would need to vacate for a period of 12 weeks whilst the work is undertaken.  No options to relocate Plunket during any reconstruction have been identified and it would need to consider basing its service at another existing clinic.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Drawings

63

     

Signatories

Authors

Peter Loud - Team Leader Community Facilities

Authorisers

Louise Mason - Manager Community Development, Arts and Culture

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

 



Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 





Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 

Allocation of Funding for Youth Skills and Employment

 

File No.: CP2014/09095

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To allocate funding for youth skills and employment from the Economic Development budget line in the 2013-2014 financial year.

2.       To outline the proposal from the Huarahi Makuru Trust to develop and provide a youth skills and employment programme in the Warkworth-Wellsford subdivision of the Rodney Local Board area.

3.       This report was on the April local board business meeting agenda and it was resolved at that meeting that the report be deferred until it had been discussed with Economic Development portfolio holders. That discussion has taken place.

Executive Summary

4.       The Rodney Local Board approved a budget of $60,000 for the further development of youth skills, training and employment programmes in the 2013-2014 financial year.

5.       The Huarahi Makuru Trust (the Trust) is seeking funding of $60,000 from the Rodney Local Board to co-ordinate, administer and manage a business mentoring/internship programme in the Warkworth and Wellsford areas. Young people participate in a twenty week internship programme with a local business mentor and gain NZQA qualifications during this time.

6.       A primary goal is to increase the number of training and learning opportunities in the area by building relationships with new training providers and encouraging them to provide relevant courses, particularly at Level 3 NZQA and above. There are currently very few opportunities in Warkworth and Wellsford to obtain post-secondary qualifications.

7.       Some of this work has been undertaken on a voluntary basis since October 2013 and there has been considerable interest from the business community, education providers and young people.

8.       In order to grow the programme to its full potential, the Huarahi Makuru Trust wants to employ a paid co-ordinator.

 

 

Recommendations

That the Rodney Local Board:

a)      allocate $60,000 from the 2013-2014 youth skills and employment budget line to the Huarahi Makuru Trust for the purpose of establishing a business internship programme in the Warkworth-Wellsford subdivision.

b)      if supported, agree to grant funding to the Huarahi Makuru Trust subject to Council officers negotiating a funding agreement with the Trust.

 

 

Discussion

9.       In the Rodney Local Board Agreement 2013-2014, a budget line of $60,000 from the Economic Development budget was approved for initiatives and projects that included:

·    Provide programmes to create local job opportunities and develop skills for partnering with business and providers such as Springboard Community Trust

·    Support youth employment and training initiatives, such as the Ngati Whatua o Kaipara housing project.

10.     This money has not been allocated to date and if it is not spent before 30 June 2014 it will forfeited.

11.     The Huarahi Makuru Trust is an incorporated charitable trust based in Warkworth that is focused on implementing a business linked internship programme for young people. The trustees include established members of the business community and the chair of the Board of Trustees of Mahurangi College.

12.     The Business Linked Internship Scheme (b.l.i.s.) aims to increase education and training opportunities for young people in Warkworth and Wellsford. The programme provides young people work experience with a business mentor for twenty weeks and during this time they gain NZQA qualifications. The model is based on the Otorohanga Youth Connections initiative but has been adapted for local conditions with increased emphasis on education and training.

13.     A real issue for young people in Warkworth and Wellsford is the lack of local post-secondary training opportunities. While a number of providers offer NZQA Level 1 and 2 courses (the very basic school leaving standard), there are few options for young people beyond this. They generally have to move away or travel long distances if they want to continue learning and gain qualifications after leaving. 

14.     A report commissioned by ATEED in September 2012, Job Skills Audit for Youth Employment in the Warkworth, Wellsford and Snells Beach Areas, highlighted the need to expand training provision in the north. It identified the lack of local relevant training as a barrier to apprenticeship pathways and limiting potential opportunities for growth in areas such as horticulture, engineering, early childhood, hospitality, health support, joinery manufacturing, mechanics and specialist driving.

15.     While there are other organisations working to increase employment outcomes, they are generally funded to work specifically with marginalised young people who are struggling with a multitude of issues. The gap that b.l.i.s. intends to fill is the lack of training opportunities and practical career support for the 60% of “average” young people leaving the two local colleges.

16.     The main focus of b.l.i.s. is to create and support relationships between young people and business mentors that will increase learning opportunities and ultimately lead to quality employment outcomes.  The key components of their programme include:

·    Developing a database of local businesses

·    Hosting business champions events

·    Organising individual meetings with potential businesses and assessing their employment needs

·    Promoting the programme to young people

·    Working with young people to establish vocational pathways including individualised education/employment plans

·    Supporting young people to gain interview, presentation and employment practice skills

·    Matching student employment interests with employer requirements

·    Follow up and tracking student pathways to further education, training or employment

·    Building relationships and collaboration amongst key stakeholders.

17.     There is a particular emphasis in the proposal on building relationships with and attracting more training providers in the area to provide a wider range of local learning opportunities. This includes industry training organisations, technical institutes and private providers.

18.     The first 12 months of the programme is essentially an establishment period with a focus on building relationships, developing systems and processes and gaining credibility. During this period the Trust intends to:

·    Sign up 30 business champions

·    Place 20 young people in internships/apprenticeships/cadetships

·    Attract 8 NZQA accreditors.

19.     Some of the work and collaborative relationship building outlined in the proposal is already underway as there has been a b.l.i.s. co-ordinator working on a voluntary basis since October 2013. This includes:

·    Database of more than 300 local businesses created

·    Business Champions Breakfast attended by 70 people

·    Businesses (20) confirmed offer internships and career support

·    Meetings with Mahurangi College, Mahurangi Technical Institute, Futureworks, Career Services, Ministry of Education, Industry Training Organisations and a range of other training providers

·    Beginning of more collaborative working relationships across the education, training and business sectors.

20.       This initial groundwork has been important in gauging the potential success of this model. There has been significant interest from businesses, colleges, training providers and young people. 

21.       The Trust wants to build on this momentum and is seeking funding to employ a paid b.l.i.s. co-ordinator to develop and implement the programme in 2014. Funding is sought to cover the period 1 April 2014 to 31 March 2015. Details of the proposed expenditure are on page 5 of the proposal (Attachment A).

22.       From 2015, there are a number of other funding options the Trust intends to explore which include:

·    Accessing the Auckland wide Youth Connections funding pool supported by the Tindall Foundation

·    Partial funding (the pastoral care component) from the Youth Guarantees programmes – available where an NCEA certificate is offered

·    Ministry of Social Development – may redirect current regional contracts to local providers.

23.       The ability of the Trust to access these and other avenues of funding will be significantly enhanced if it has a successful first year of operation. This is commonly acknowledged as a difficult field to work in because of the complex interface of skills required (the ability to work with young people, training providers and businesses). Programmes that can show they are making a real difference to young people’s training and employment prospects tend to be both supported and replicated.

24.       Both the Manager of the Business and Local Economic Development Planning Team and the Project Manager of Youth Connections are supportive of this initiative. They see it as well aligned with other Youth Connections activities and believe it has significant potential to achieve improved economic outcomes.

25.       The Economic Development Team recommend that sufficient funding is allocated to allow the programme to operate effectively and meet its goals in the first year without the need to be constantly looking for additional funding.

26.       If funding is approved, a funding agreement will be negotiated that will include clear expectations, outcomes and deliverables. It will also include processes for reporting back to the Local Board.

 

Consideration

Local Board Views

27.     The purpose of this report is to obtain a decision from the Rodney Local Board.

Maori Impact Statement

28.     The b.l.i.s. programme acknowledges that Maori are underrepresented in educational achievement outcomes and that Maori will be users of this programme. Discussions have been held with Ngati Manuhiri.

General

29.     This report does not invoke the Auckland Council Significance Policy.

Implementation Issues

30.     There are no implementation issues.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Youth Connections Programme for the Warkworth Wellsford

71

     

Signatories

Authors

Sue Dodds – Senior Community Development Project Leader

Tony Rea - Manager Community development & Partnerships – West

Authorisers

Louise Mason - Manager Community Development, Arts and Culture

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 







Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 

Puhoi Volunteer Rural Fire Station Approval to Lease over Puhoi Pioneers Memorial Park (52 Ahuroa Road, Puhoi)

 

File No.: CP2014/08293

 

  

Purpose

1.    a) To seek land owner approval from the Rodney Local Board for the construction of a stormwater dispersal field within the adjoining esplanade reserve to manage stormwater flows from the new building and paved surfaces proposed in the design.

 

b) To seek approval to enter into an agreement to lease between Auckland Council and the Puhoi Volunteer Rural Fire Force Incorporated for the land at 52 Ahuroa Road, Puhoi being Lot 2 DP 199344, to enable the construction of a new purpose built fire station.

 

c)  To seek approval for a community lease to the Puhoi Volunteer Rural Fire Force Incorporated entered into once the new fire station has been completed.

Executive summary

2.    The Puhoi Volunteer Rural Fire Force Incorporated (the PVR Fire Force) has been planning for a number of years to relocate from their current site at 1 Ahuroa Road to the more appropriate location at 52 Ahuroa Road on the Puhoi Pioneers Memorial Park Reserve (see Attachment A - Locality Aerial). Relocation to this property is contemplated in the Puhoi Pioneers Memorial Park Management Plan (2009). Currently there is an existing house on the site which has been tenanted for some time under the control of Auckland Council Property Limited (ACPL). This tenancy has now ceased.

 

3.    A resource consent was granted 27 March 2013 in relation to the project which included very minor changes to the approved fire station building. As the original consent did not explicitly address the removal of the existing dwelling a subsequent application was submitted in March 2014.

 

4.    The fire station will be constructed over Lot 2 DP 199344 which is vested in the council as Local Purpose (Fire Station) Reserve. The fire station will comprise a main building, decking, parking, on-site wastewater disposal system, and landscaping and will be funded by the PVR Fire Force (see Attachment B - Site and Building Plans).

 

5.    Adjoining the northern boundary of the site is an esplanade reserve (Lot 4 DP 75274), which has been identified in the reserve management plan as an area for restoration in native plants.  The PVR Fire Force proposes to construct a stormwater dispersal system within the esplanade reserve to serve the facility due to topographical and spatial constraints on the site. This proposal was incorporated in the technical information associated with the existing resource consent.

 

6.    It is recommended that the Rodney Local Board:

·    grants land owner approval for the stormwater dispersal system subject to conditions.

·    grants approval for an agreement to lease to bridge the time between approval and building completion. (Landowner approval is implicit in the granting of approval for the agreement to lease).

·    approves a community lease being entered into once a Code Compliance Certificate has issued in respect of the fire station building.

 

 

 

Recommendations

That the Rodney Local Board:

a)         grants landowner approval to the Puhoi Volunteer Rural Fire Force Incorporated to construct a stormwater disposal system within the esplanade reserve in Lot 4 DP 75274 adjoining the northern site boundary, subject to the attached conditions (see Attachment C – Landowner Approval Conditions) which include conditions relating to the construction of the fire station.

b)         approves an agreement to lease to the Puhoi Volunteer Rural Fire Force Incorporated to construct and operate a new purpose built fire station at 52 Ahuroa Road, being that part of the Puhoi Pioneers Memorial Park contained in Lot 2 DP 199344. The agreement to lease will be for a period of two years commencing 12 May 2014.

c)         agrees that upon the issue of a Code Compliance Certificate for the building, a community lease be granted to the Puhoi Volunteer Rural Fire Force Incorporated subject to the following terms and conditions: 

i)          Term – 10 years from the date of compliance with one 10 year right of renewal

ii)         Rent - $1.00 per annum if requested

iii)         Provision of a community outcomes plan as approved and attached to the lease document (see Attachment D – Community Outcomes Plan)

iv)        Compliance with the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977 and the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012.

 

Comments

 

1.       The Puhoi Volunteer Rural Fire Force Incorporated (the PVR Fire Force) are seeking to relocate from their current site at 1 Ahuroa Road to Puhoi Pioneers Memorial Park Reserve (52 Ahuroa Road) which has been identified as a more suitable site. The relocation of the fire station will improve the operation of the volunteer fire service and its ability to adequately service the community in the foreseeable future.

2.       The fire station is contemplated in Objective 1(iii) of the Puhoi Pioneers Memorial Park Management Plan (2009). The proposed new location is in line with the classification of the subject site.

3.       The proposal will involve the removal of the existing dwelling from site and the construction of a new single level building with an area of 320m˛. This will be a rectangular shaped building with a slightly offset gabled roof and will have a maximum height of 7m. The building will be clad in aluminum prefinished weatherboards and will have a Colorsteel corrugated iron roof.

4.       The fire station building will contain two fire engine bays which will house two fire appliances and a utility vehicle, an officers/communications room, store room, drying room, wash-down room, training room, toilets, showers and kitchen.

5.       A car-parking area accommodating 13 vehicles, including two spaces for the physically impaired, is proposed to be located at the front of the building. A 2 metre high sound attenuating fence is proposed along the western side boundary. Two in-ground water tanks will be located to the east of the proposed building.

6.       The existing fire siren will be retained at its present site at 1 Ahuroa Road, closer to the centre of the village.

7.       Adjoining the northern boundary of the site is an esplanade reserve (Lot 4 DP 75274), which has been identified in the reserve management plan as an area for restoration in native plants. The PVR Fire Force proposes to construct a stormwater dispersal system within the esplanade reserve to serve the facility due to topographical and spatial constraints on the site. This proposal was incorporated in the technical information associated with the existing resource consent. The proposed stormwater dispersal system will consist of a 6m wide trench over a length of 25m with an average depth of 0.8m.  This will act to allow as much of the water as possible to soak into the ground with the excess flowing overland, across grassland to the Puhoi River. The geotechnical engineering report indicates that this design will not be detrimental to the esplanade reserve and will not exacerbate stream bank erosion on the reserve. The proposal will include native planting as part of the stormwater mitigation.

8.       A landscape drawing, prepared by Phillippa Beagley and dated 30 June 2012, has been submitted showing a comprehensive planting design for the site (see Attachment E – Planting Plan). Pedestrian access through the reserve will be created allowing visitors to gain access to the esplanade reserve to the rear of the subject site.

9.       Auckland Council Rural Fire has a set budget this financial year (carried forward from the 2012/13 financial year) to contribute to the costs of developing and building the fire station at 52 Ahuroa Road. Funds will also be derived from the PVR Fire Force and other sources including charitable and other organisations. Council has supported the PVR Fire Force by gifting the site and contributing $200,000 in the 2013/14 financial year.

10.     A resource consent was granted 27 March 2013 in relation to the project which included very minor changes to the approved fire station building. As the original consent did not explicitly address the removal of the existing dwelling, a subsequent application was submitted in March, 2014 and is currently being processed. The tenancy of the dwelling has been terminated and the house has recently become vacant. The fire station will be operated in accordance with the conditions of resource consent, which include noise control and the permitted use of the fire station.

11.     Council manages 16 volunteer rural fire forces and is responsible for the management and response of Rural Fire throughout the Auckland region as part of its statutory rural fire responsibilities. The PVR Fire Force is one of the 16 under council management.

12.     The PVR Fire Force is the first responder to any local civil defence emergencies in its area and the Puhoi community relies on them heavily in times of such emergencies. The proposed new station will also serve as a civil defence assembly point.

13.     The majority of the PVR Fire Force crew is trained to Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) Orange Card level being the highest a rural fire fighter can obtain. The PVR Fire Force responds in conjunction with other emergency services to life threatening medical and other emergency incidents.

14.     In this case an Agreement to Lease with the Puhoi Volunteer Rural Fire Force Incorporated will bridge the time between approval and building completion. This allows the PVR Fire Force certainty of tenure in applying for all necessary consents, funding and resources. A term of two years is recommended.

15.     Upon the issue of a Code Compliance Certificate for the building, it is recommended that a community lease be granted for 10 years with one 10 year right of renewal, subject to the terms and conditions of the Reserves Act 1977 and the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012. A community outcomes plan has been negotiated with the PVR Fire Force and will be attached to the lease with local board approval.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

16.     The former Rodney Halls, Reserves and Kawau Island Committee was consulted on this request in 2012 and supports the relocation of the fire station. On 4 April 2014, a special meeting was held with two members of the Community Services & Facilities Portfolio Holders at which time the matter was discussed briefly and was given informal support.

Maori impact statement

17.     Ngati Manuhiri has been consulted and have indicated that they will attend initial soil stripping works. The land is not referenced as a heritage site in the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan.

18.     There are no identified waahi tapu on the property. Any wastewater is being treated well away from the Puhoi River. It is considered that there are no Maori or Iwi impacts relating to the granting of land owner approval.

Implementation

19.     The construction of the fire station and development of the site will be funded by Auckland Council Rural Fire, PVR Fire Force and other sources including charitable and other organisations. The property will be owned and maintained by the PVR Fire Force and its responsibilities will accord with the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 with respect to a community group owned building.

20.     After a two year maintenance period Auckland Council would become responsible for maintenance of the stormwater dispersal system in the same way as for any other stormwater system within reserve land that is not a public drain.

21.     There are no identified legal implications to providing land owner approval and any other legal implications will be dealt with through the consent process.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Attachment A Locality Aerial

81

bView

Attachment B Site and Building Plans

83

cView

Attachment C Landowner Approval Conditions

91

dView

Attachment D Community Outcomes Plan

93

eView

Attachment E Planting Plan

95

     

Signatories

Authors

Karen Walby - Advisor Community Lease

Stanley Bolton - Park & Recreation Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason - Manager Community Development, Arts and Culture

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Ian Maxwell - Manager Parks, Sports & Recreation

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 



Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 

 

Landowner Approval Conditions – Puhoi Volunteer Rural Fire Force Incorporated

 

 

i)          The Parks Advisor and Parks and Open Space Specialist (North) shall be informed upon commencement and completion of the works;

ii)         All work shall proceed in general accordance with the reports and plans as follows:

·    Proposed Puhoi Fire Station at 52 Ahuroa Rd Puhoi drawings numbered A01 – A05 and D01 – D03 inclusive prepared by Making Plans Limited dated 26 March 2014

·    Planting Plan Proposed Fire Station for Puhoi Rural Fire Force, 52 Ahuroa Rd, Puhoi prepared by Phillipa Beagley dated 30 June 2012.

iii)         The Puhoi Volunteer Rural Fire Force Incorporated shall ensure that comprehensive insurance is in place to cover all construction works prior to commencement.

iv)        The planting plan shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Parks and Recreation Advisor North. The applicant is to be responsible for the maintenance of all reserve landscaping including that over the proposed stormwater dispersal system, and the replacement of any dead or dying vegetation.

v)         The applicant shall install the proposed stormwater dispersal system and associated plantings and shall remain responsible for its maintenance within the 2 year maintenance period.  Thereafter, upon final acceptance, the council will assume maintenance responsibility.

vi)        Any physical work, including excavation, must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992, Health and Safety in Employment Amendment Act 2002, and any regulations made pursuant to Section 21 of the Act.

vii)       Ngati Manuhiri shall be notified prior to earthworks commencing so that they may have an iwi representative on site to monitor the initial stripping.

viii)       If any artefact, including human remains or middens are exposed during any site works the following procedures shall apply:

a.         Immediately when an artefact has been exposed, all site works shall cease;

b.         The site supervisor shall immediately secure the area in a way that ensures that any artefacts or remains are untouched; and

c.         The site supervisor shall notify tangata whenua, the New Zealand Historic Places Trust, the Department of Conservation and the Council’s Northern Resource Consenting & Compliance Administration Officer and, in the case of human remains, the Police, that an archaeological site has been exposed, so that appropriate action can be taken. This includes such people being given a reasonable time as determined by the Council to record and recover the archaeological features discovered before work may recommence on the site.

ix)         All practical steps shall be implemented to protect the safety of the public during site preparation, construction and following the completion of the work. The work areas shall be adequately fenced to prevent public access within 5m of the work areas.

x)         Construction site danger warning signage shall be maintained in a clear and legible condition free of graffiti.  Also signage boards indicating the nature of the works, project description, contractor details, completion date and site works supervisor 24/7 contact details for the public shall be maintained in a clear and legible condition free of graffiti.     

xi)        All noise generated by the approved works shall comply with the provisions of the New Zealand Standard NZS 6803:1999 “Acoustics – Construction Noise”.           

xii)       Works shall not commence before 8am nor continue past dusk or 6pm, whichever is earlier and shall not be undertaken during weekends or public holidays without prior approval from the Parks Advisor.

xiii)       It is the responsibility of the applicant to document with photographs, video or both the pre-existing condition of any assets in the park around the construction area. Should a dispute arise, the photographic record shall be produced to determine an assets condition prior to work commencing. Failure by the applicant to create any record prior to works commencement, will result in Council determining what is to be reinstated by the applicant and the extent to which any asset shall be repaired should that be required. Any costs shall be met by the applicant.

xiv)      The reserve shall be left clean, tidy and clear of rubbish, debris and building materials on completion of the works. The applicant shall remedy (at its expense) any damage and disturbance caused to reserve areas and remove surplus soil and construction materials from the works area to the satisfaction of the Parks Advisor.

xv)       Any vegetation removed or damaged at the site as a consequence of the works shall be replaced to current Planting and Lawn Works Specifications – Parks, Sports and Recreation (North) standard. The applicant shall be responsible for maintaining plants for a two year period from the date of acceptance of the planting by council.

xvi)      Should the need arise to import additional soil, this shall be certified clean fill, free of contamination obtained from a commercial source.  Fill material shall be placed in an approved manner.  Finished contours within the area allocated for public pedestrian access from Ahuroa Road shall optimally provide for the formation of a pathway of least gradient and satisfactory in all respects to the Parks Advisor. 

xvii)     No future changes shall be made to the assets on site without the prior approval of the Manager, Local and Sports Parks - North.

xviii)     All other relevant consents shall be obtained before works commence (e.g. Tree Consent, Building Consent, Resource Consent).  No trees shall be removed from the site without the prior approval of council’s arborist and Parks and Open Space Specialist.

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 

 

Name and Location of Land/Facility

52 Ahuroa Road, Puhoi

 

Puhoi Pioneers Memorial Park

Name of the Community it serves

Puhoi and surrounding communities

Local Board Area

Rodney

Name of Community Group

Puhoi Volunteer Rural Fire Force Incorporated

Postal Address

C/o Russell Green

 

PO Box 404082 Puhoi

 

Auckland 1243

Contact person

Russell Green

Name of Community Lease Advisor

Karen Walby

 

 

Auckland Council and/or Local Board Priority

Performance Measure

Target

Achievements

Auckland Plan Strategic Direction 1:

Put children and young people first.

Puhoi Volunteer Rural Fire Force hold fire safety open days. The lectures include a design feature aimed at child awareness.

 

Puhoi Volunteer Rural Fire Force train up local youth as crew members.

1 Training day held on bi-annual basis.

 

 

 

 

Train 1 youth per annum.

(Annual Report)

Local Board Priority 6:

Engage with our diverse communities and provide for their social and cultural needs “Supporting each community to maintain its own identity and ensuring quality of life for all happens in many different ways. Community safety initiatives are part of providing for the social and cultural wellbeing of our communities.”

 

 

 

Auckland Plan Strategic Direction 1:

Increase the proportion of residents who rate a sense of community in their neighbourhood

Priority 3:

Strengthen Communities

Puhoi Volunteer Rural Fire Force undertakes weekly training meetings.

 

Puhoi Volunteer Rural Fire Force undertakes shared regional training with Civil Defence, St Johns Ambulance, Police, and Search and Rescue.

 

Puhoi Volunteer Rural Fire Force members organise family events such as pot luck dinners and BBQs (in accordance with terms of Resource Consent L59025)

 

Puhoi Volunteer Rural Fire Force contribute to community events by way of providing fire engine rides and manning BBQs, etc.

 52 training meetings per annum

 

 

3 combined regional training sessions per annum

 

 

 

 

Maximum of 6 events per annum

 

 

 

 

Contribute to 5 community events per annum.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Annual Report)

Local Board Priority 7:  Protect and enhance our environment

“Rodney has many significant natural areas, a strong rural character and a long tradition of environmentally-friendly initiatives.”

 

 

Volunteers to manage facility, including (with prior consent of council) planting of trees, shrubs and hedges along the boundaries of the premises.

Minimum of 3 committee members including a Chairperson, Honorary Secretary and/or Treasurer

 

 

 

 

(Annual Report)

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 



Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 

Gateways Rodney - construction of gateway features

 

File No.: CP2014/08861

 

  

Purpose

1.       To update the Rodney Local Board about comments received from local communities on the draft prioritised schedule of creating township gateways. This information will assist the local board to finalise the township gateway schedule and budgets.

Executive summary

2.       The Rodney Local Board is looking to create gateway features at the entrances to the district’s towns and villages. Funding has been set aside over the next few years to achieve this. A draft prioritised schedule of township gateways was presented to the local board at its 9 September 2013 meeting where it was decided to seek comments from the district’s various local communities. A number of community and business groups have indicated their interest in pursuing the local board’s initiative. These requests have been considered and as a result a revised prioritised schedule has been prepared.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a)      approve $15,000 from the 2013/2014 ‘enhance the northern, western and eastern gateways to LB area’ budget to be allocated to the Kaukapakapa Area Residents and Ratepayers Association to assist with the design and installation of their gateway features.

b)      progress gateway features for Helensville, Kumeu Huapai, Parakai, Waimauku and Riverhead once the North West District Business Improvement Association is established.

c)      request council staff to contact and/or meet with the Te Hana, Warkworth, Wellsford, Puhoi, Kawau Island, Omaha Beach and Whangateau resident and business groups to discuss gateway features and that staff report back to the local board with a recommended course of action by 31 August 2014.

 

 

Comments

 

Background

3.       Funding for gateway features has been allocated through the council’s Long-term plan to gateway projects and $104,858.00 has been set aside for the 2013/14 financial year. With this funding it is envisaged that entrance ways for main towns would be funded to the value of $30,000.00 and those for towns and villages between $5,000.00 and $15,000.00.

A report was presented to the Rodney Local Board at its 9 September 2013 meeting. The report outlined a draft prioritised schedule for townships which had an immediate and medium term need. Those with an immediate need were:

·    Helensville

·    Kaipara Flats

·    Kaukapakapa

·    Kumeu Huapai

·    Matakana

·    Te Hana

Those with a medium term need were:

·    Warkworth

·    Wellsford

·    Puhoi

·    Riverhead

4.       At this meeting the Board resolved (RD/2013/271) to:

a)   Agree to seek comment from local communities on the draft prioritised schedule of township gateways.

b)   Request that following receipt of any comment or proposals on the draft prioritised schedule of township gateways, the matter be reported back in order to finalise the schedule and budgets at a Local Board business meeting.

5.       Rodney business associations and resident and ratepayer groups were contacted on 28 February 2014. The groups were asked if they would be interested in creating gateway features for their towns and villages. The following groups expressed an interest.

6.       Main Towns

·    Te Awaroa Residents and Ratepayers (Helensville)

·    Warkworth Area Business Association Inc.

·    Wellsford Promotions and Wellsford Citizens and Ratepayers Association

7.       Towns and Villages

·    Kaukapakapa Area Residents and Ratepayers Association

·    Omaha Beach Community Inc.

·    Puhoi Community Forum Inc.

·    Riverhead Residents and Ratepayers Association

·    South Kaipara Residents and Ratepayers (Parakai)

·    Whangateau Residents and Ratepayers Association Inc.

8.       Islands

·    Kawau Island

Immediate need – Main Towns/Towns and Villages

Te Awaroa Residents and Ratepayers Association (Helensville)

9.       Two towns which were identified (within the draft prioritised schedule agreed on 9 September 2013) as having an immediate need for gateway features expressed an interest; they were Helensville and Kaukapakapa.

Helensville

10.     Te Awaroa Residents and Ratepayers Association has indicated that it is keen to progress this project.

11.     As of 1 July 2014 the North-West District Business Association (including the former Helensville Business Association) will operate a Business Improvement District Partnership programme (BID) and will join 46 existing BID programmes operating throughout the region.

12.     One objective of the programme will be to develop collaborative branding for Rodney’s towns and villages. It will include the seven settlements that make up the North-West Business Association. These are: Helensville, Kumeu Huapai, Parakai, Waimauku, Riverhead and Kaukapakapa.

13.     One of the goals is to create an overarching brand for this area; however the BID will support and facilitate the development of local identities for these settlements.

14.     It is anticipated that there will be a degree of overlap between creating gateway features and developing a clearly recognisable ‘marketing brand’ for these towns. It is considered prudent therefore, to wait until the BID has been established for Helensville and the remaining settlements (with the exception of Kaukapakapa) before progressing gateway features for this town. That way any entranceway feature can work with the overarching brand for the north-west.

Kaukapakapa

15.     A design and rationale for gateway features have already been prepared for Kaukapakapa and this community is presently liaising with the New Zealand Transport Agency in terms of site selection and appropriate materials. The design reflects local identity, and is not considered to compromise in any way the BID process. It is recommended that $15,000.00 from the 2013/2014 budget be allocated to Kaukapakapa Area Residents and Ratepayers Association to assist with the design and installation of the currently designed gateway features.

Matakana and Kaipara Flats

16.     The Matakana and the Kaipara Flats communities were also identified (within the draft prioritised schedule agreed on 9 September 2013) as having an immediate need for gateway features. However they have yet to express an interest and it is therefore recommended that gateway features for these townships not be progressed at this stage.

Medium term priority – Main Towns/Towns and Villages

17.     All four towns which were identified (within the draft prioritised schedule) as having a medium term need for gateway features expressed an interest. They were Wellsford, Warkworth, Puhoi and Riverhead.

18.     It is recommended that council staff meet with the relevant community and business community groups associated with Wellsford, Warkworth and Puhoi. The purpose of the meeting(s) will be to determine project scope and who will be responsible for overseeing the project. In due course, council staff will report back to the local board with a recommended course of action.

19.     Note however that Riverhead forms part of the North-West Business Association and BID programme. It is recommended that gateway features for Riverhead are not progressed until the BID has been established. Parakai and Waimauku are also included within the North-West Business Association. It is understood that Parakai is interested in pursuing gateway features. Waimauku may also be interested to install further gateway features (in addition to the one they are currently pursuing). It is therefore recommended that these settlements be included within the revised prioritised schedule.

No immediate need

20.     Kawau Island was previously assessed as having no immediate need due to it having a clearly defined identity, multiple entrance points and a lack of any significant traffic. However it is noted that an approach has been made to the local board and it was requested that council officers contact Kawau Island representatives Ms Pardey and Mr Wood. This is considered appropriate to determine if there is any merit in any proposal put forward.

21.     The Te Hana community was also identified as having an immediate need; they also did not express an interest. However, the case is somewhat different as council staff have already prepared an initial concept plan for Te Hana. It is recommended that this community be contacted to determine whether or not they are interested in creating gateway features.

 

Not listed on the draft prioritised schedule

22.     Omaha Beach Community Inc. and Whangateau Residents and Ratepayers Association Inc. indicated that they would also like to be included in discussions about gateway features. It is recommended that council officers contact these two community groups to discuss gateway features and reporting back to the local board in due course.

Revised prioritised schedule

Immediate need

·       Kaukapakapa

Council officers to report back to the local board by 31 August 2014

·       Wellsford

·       Warkworth

·       Puhoi

·       Kawau Island

·       Omaha Beach

·       Whangateau

·       Te Hana

To be progressed after 1 July 2014

·       Helensville

·       Kumeu Huapai

·       Parakai

·       Waimauku

·       Riverhead

To not be progressed at this stage

·       Matakana

·       Kaipara Flats

Consideration

Local board views and implications

23.     Gateway features have been previously discussed with the Rodney Local Board and funding over the next few years has been set aside to achieve this initiative. A draft prioritised schedule has been prepared to help the local board decide which towns and villages should receive funding.

24.     It is also recognised that gateway features will be initiated by community groups who will in turn request funding assistance from the local board. A series of assessment criteria have been prepared to help the local board decide on whether or not it should provide funding assistance.

25.     At its 9 September 2013 meeting the local board agreed to seek comment from local communities on the draft prioritised schedule and that the matter be reported back in order to finalise the schedule and budgets.

26.     In addition discussions regarding gateway features have been held with the lead portfolio holder for the Street Environment and Town Centres Portfolio.

Maori impact statement

27.     It is proposed that engagement be undertaken with local Iwi as part of the consultative process of establishing gateway features.

Implementation

28.     Implementation issues relate to gaining the necessary resource and building consents and approvals (Auckland Transport, New Zealand Transport Association) for gateway features. To date the local communities have been managing this process, however a degree of assistance has been provided by the Council.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Kaukapakapa Gateway Design Concept

105

     

Signatories

Authors

Andrew Trevelyan - Principal Planner

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 



Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 

Quarterly Performance report for quarter ended March 2014

 

File No.: CP2014/02959

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To update the Rodney Local Board members on progress towards their objectives for the year from 1 July 2013 to 30 June 2014 as set out in the Local Board agreement.

Executive Summary

2.       This report contains the following Rodney local board reports:

- Highlights and achievements for the March 2014 quarter

- Watching brief and recommendation

- Progress updates on key initiatives and projects for the March 2014 quarter

- Activity overview for CDAC for the March 2014 quarter

- Activity overview for Libraries for the March 2014 quarter

- Activity overview for Sports, Parks and Recreation for the March 2014 quarter

- Financial report to March 2014

- Parks capital projects summary to March 2014 (Appendix A)

- CDAC workplan to March 2014 (Appendix B)

- Treasury Report for the quarter ending 31 March 2014 (Appendix C)

- Rates Funding Analysis (Appendix D)

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a)      note the Quarterly Performance Report for the Rodney Local Board for the period ended March 2014

 

 

Discussion

3.       Please find attached the Quarterly Performance report for the period ending March 2014.

Consideration

Local Board Views

4.       This report informs the Rodney Local Board of the quarterly performance to date for the period ending March 2014.

 

Maori Impact Statement

5.       Maori as stakeholders in the council, are affected and have an interest in any report on financial results. However this report does not impact specific outcomes or activities. As such the content of this report has no particular benefit to, or adverse effect on Maori.

General

6.       This report informs the board of the quarterly performance is still in its infancy. It is envisaged over the coming reports that further departments and CCO’s will be included.  Feedback is always welcome on the content and format of this report.

Implementation Issues

7.       There are no implementation issues.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Quarterly Report to the quarter ended March 2014

109

     

Signatories

Authors

Jane Koch - Business Performance Advisor

Authorisers

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Christine Watson - Manager Financial Advisory Services - Local Boards

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 






















































Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 

Bylaw review programme update - April 2014

 

File No.: CP2014/07961

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       This report provides an update on bylaw review (policy) and bylaw implementation (operations), covering June 2013 to April 2014. This joint approach to reporting ensures that local boards have a comprehensive overview of the end-to-end programme through to 2015.

Executive Summary

2.       Consultation on the proposed navigation safety bylaw closed on 17 March 2014. Staff are now preparing a summary of submissions alongside the full submissions to the hearings panel. The proposed cemeteries and crematoria bylaw was adopted by the Regulatory and Bylaws committee and Governing Body in March, and submissions opened from early April.

3.       Further proposed bylaws will be presented to the Regulatory and Bylaws committee shortly covering the next set of topics: Outdoor fires; Stormwater; Trading in public places; Alcohol controls and Animal management (covering animals other than dogs).

4.       The 2014 programme for review of local dog access rules is underway with the local boards that are proposing changes this year. Information about the proposed changes will be included with material provided as part of the annual dog registration cycle to minimise costs and ensure simplified communication with these customers.

5.       Implementation projects are well underway for the upcoming commencement of Health and hygiene (from 1 July 2014) and Public safety and nuisance (from 26 May 2014). Planning for the new Health and hygiene bylaw and associated licensing has included particular attention for operators where the rules have changed significantly. The majority of these newly registered premises will receive a visit from a member of the environmental health team, and a welcome pack that summarises the standards they are required to meet.

6.       The Alcohol licensing readiness project has now completed its key work relating to establishing the new licensing structures needed under the new alcohol act. These are running as intended from 18 December 2013.

7.       Review work is continuing on further topics to support completion of the review programme by October 2015, alongside implementation planning for the resulting changes.

8.       No formal requests for local board bylaws have been received over the period covered by this report.

9.       An investment proposal for the integrated programme is being progressed, to be submitted for consideration as part of preparing the draft 2015-2024 Long-term Plan.

 

 

Recommendations

That the Rodney Local Board:

a)      note the progress of bylaw review and implementation and the forward programme that will complete the review of the legacy bylaws by 2015.

 

 

Discussion

The bylaw review programme

10.     The bylaw review programme was originally endorsed by the Regulatory and Bylaws committee in December 2010 (refer CP2010/00962) and February 2011 (refer CP2011/00453). It will review the legacy bylaws (that is, the bylaws inherited from the former councils) across approximately 30 topics. A new bylaw will be prepared for each topic where appropriate, or a recommendation made that the underlying issue or outcome is better handled another way.

11.     The Regulatory and Bylaws Committee has ownership of the review and local boards are participating through individual workshops and reports. Local Boards are also able to propose that local bylaws are made, to apply only in their area (refer sections 24 to 28 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009). Any requests for local bylaws are reported to the Regulatory and Bylaws committee. As stated above, there have been no local board proposals for local bylaws over the last period. This report covers the period June 2013 to April 2014.

12.     As this is the first report on this programme since the 2013 local government elections, attachment A provides a brief background to bylaws, including an outline of each bylaw topic.

Update on review of bylaw topics

13.     The current state of the review work programme is presented in the table below and the detailed comments for several topics that follow. Attachment B provides an overview of the timeline for the programme.

14.     The table below includes reviews that have already been completed. It also covers bylaws that may be folded into other topics (Freedom camping; Arkles Bay Set Netting); the ongoing local boards’ review of dog access rules; and the review that must take place within five years of any bylaw’s adoption.

 

Table 1: Summary of status and next steps for review of bylaw topics

 

Topic

Status and Progress – 7 stages

Comments

 

Status

1-Preparation

2-Pre-consultation

3-Options

4-Write Bylaw

5-Adopt draft

6-Spec Cons Proc

7-Adopt final

 

Reviews completed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dog management

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Completed

Election Signs

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Completed

Food safety

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Completed

General administration

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Completed

Health & hygiene

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Completed

Offensive trades

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Completed

Public safety and nuisance

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Completed

Solid waste (Waste m/ment)

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Completed

Trade waste

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Completed

Transport (Auckland Transport)

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Completed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Work programme

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Navigation Safety

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See below

Outdoor / Rural fires

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Trading in public places

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See below

Stormwater management

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Signs

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See below

Election signs (amend)

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See below

Alcohol licensing fees

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Alcohol controls

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See below

Animal management

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Air quality

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Boarding houses and hostels

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cemeteries and crematoria

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commercial sex industry

A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On hold pending unitary plan outcomes

Construction and development

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Onsite wastewater

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hazardous Substances

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See below

Orakei Basin

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Recreational and cultural facilities

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Transport (Parks / AC controlled land

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Water supply and wastewater (reticulation)

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wharfs & Marinas

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other work

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Review - local dog access rules

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reviews by local boards - ongoing

Filming fee review

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See below

Freedom camping

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Arkles Bay set netting

G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Five year reviews

B

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Status summary codes

G

Green - Work is progressing as planned, due date will be met or any revised date will not have wider impacts

A

Amber – Original due date at risk of being missed and this may have wider impacts; or an issue has arisen.

R

Red - Due date has or will be missed and this will have wider impacts; or an issue has arisen that will have wider or significant impacts.

B

Blue - Not yet scheduled. However, background work is underway.

 

Table 2: Additional comments for particular topics in the bylaw review programme

 

Public safety & nuisance

On track

G

This bylaw topic crosses the jurisdiction of both Auckland Council and Auckland Transport (meaning there are two parallel bylaws). The new bylaws were adopted in 2013 and come into force in May 2014.

 

Navigation safety

On track

G

Public submissions were invited on this topic from 14 February to 17 March. Just under 400 submissions were received and are being reviewed. A range of communication approaches – including radio and attendance at relevant events – were used to help publicise the proposal and invite submissions. Hearings are expected in May.

 

Trading in public places (policy and bylaw)

On track

G

This review will deliver a single draft policy and two draft bylaws (for the council and Auckland Transport). Drafting of these is well underway. It is expected that these will be reported to the Regulatory and Bylaws committee and then the governing body in May. Any new bylaws could come into force for July 2015 (allowing any fee changes to also be put in place with the council’s long-term plan).

 

Signs

On track

G

Discussions with local boards are currently underway to identify their views on particular matters including local approaches to issues such as sandwich boards and cross-street banners. Comments from those discussions and other discussions with representatives of businesses and the signage industry will support the preparation of a draft bylaw later in 2014.

 

This project is also monitoring the progress of the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan, as this plan also includes signage provisions.

 

Election signs (amendment)

On track

G

The Election signs bylaw was adopted by Auckland Transport in May 2013, and was in place for the 2013 local government election. A number of operational issues arose during that election period, and the clarity of relevant clauses is planned to be addressed through a series of drafting amendments that will support a better democratic process. These improve clarity for issues including the use of candidate and “team” signs, signs on private property, the readability of authoriser statements and the display of signs promoting election issues rather than candidates or teams. The amendments also provide for the possible later addition of explanatory notes into the bylaw, where desirable to provide further guidance.

 

The proposed amendments are being reported to the Auckland Transport Board in April, to allow for consultation on the proposed changes. Local boards will receive further information then.

 

Changes are also being considered to remove or adjust some of the specified sign sites in the western area. These follow a review of sites against criteria including practicality and safety, and are intended to address issues that arose in 2013. Those local boards where changes are being considered will receive further information on this.

 

Alcohol controls

On track

G

Each of the legacy councils had adopted an Alcohol Control bylaw, and put in place a series of alcohol controls through that bylaw. Alcohol controls (previously called liquor bans) prohibit the consumption of alcohol within a specified place, during a specified time.

 

Legislative changes introduced alongside the government’s reform of laws relating to the sale and supply of alcohol provide the council and police with enhanced powers in relation to alcohol controls. Those changes also require the council to review its existing alcohol controls against a new threshold, as part of any decision to carry those controls forward past October 2015. Following a review of available data, the majority of existing controls across Auckland are considered to meet the new requirements.

 

A proposed bylaw is planned to be reported to the Regulatory and Bylaws committee shortly. The existing bylaws are broadly similar, and so the new proposed bylaw will largely seek to continue the current arrangements. In line with consultation with local boards from 2011 (alongside other alcohol-related matters), the new bylaw will facilitate local board involvement in decisions on alcohol controls and an improved community-based focus on alcohol issues.

 

Community-focussed approaches may include crime prevention through environmental design, local community initiatives, discussions with nearby licensees, youth and leadership development programmes, partnering with central government agencies including the Police and the Ministry of Justice, and partnering with local agencies including sports clubs and iwi and town centre / business associations.

 

These non-regulatory approaches can often lead to significant reductions in alcohol harm and have better long-term effects than regulatory approaches such as making an alcohol control.

 

Hazardous substances

On track

G

The former Auckland City Council had a hazardous substances bylaw. A review of this bylaw has indicated that the issues it covered are now addressed adequately through other means, including provisions in other bylaws, the Resource Management Act, National environmental standards, and regulations made under various acts.

 

Comment is being sought from the local boards where the legacy bylaw currently applies, following which a proposed approach (that could include allowing the bylaw to lapse in 2015) will be brought to the Regulatory and Bylaws committee.

 

Dog access review

On track

G

Local boards are able to review dog access rules for local parks and local beaches in their areas on an annual basis. This allows a better response to community views than was possible under the legacy councils’ approaches.

 

For 2014 selected dog access are being reviewed by the following local boards: Kaipatiki, Orakei, Maungakiekie-Tamaki, Puketapapa, and Hibiscus and Bays.

 

To ensure that registered dog owners are advised of the proposed changes (as required by legislation) the local boards are including a joint notice within the dog registration package in June. This will reduce costs, and ensure that dog owners receive a single combined communication from the council, rather than multiple messages.

 

Filming fees review

On track

G

The Auckland Film Protocol was adopted in 2013, after wide consultation with local boards, the screen production industry, council-controlled organisations and other stakeholders. The protocol aims to create a film-friendly culture across Auckland, based on a two way commitment from the wider council organisation and from filmmakers. It also seeks to help deliver a customer driven service that provides certainty to filmmakers in a globally competitive market, and to enable public good will towards the film industry by setting out expectations of film crews when filming in public places.

 

Currently there is a range of filming fee structures in place, inherited from the former councils. A filming fees review is now underway to understand how this element of the filming process can be harmonised and improved. The Policies and Bylaws unit is working with ATEED on this project, and it is expected that local board input will be sought on this over the next few months.

 

 

Update on implementation of new bylaws

15.     Detailed implementation planning is developed by the responsible operations division alongside the process for reviewing each of the bylaws, through a cross council programme called the Integrated Bylaw Review and Implementation (IBRI) programme. Initial planning for implementation starts when the bylaw topic review identifies the issues and options related to each topic. This approach provides the operations division an early indication of the possible shape of the bylaw and its implementation considerations.

16.     This programme includes the main groups involved in operating bylaws and delivering the relevant services to our customers. The programme is also helping ensure bylaw reviews can be aligned to other related transformational changes such as the consolidation of information technology systems, customer service improvement programmes and the organisation’s capacity to implement those changes.

17.     Implementation of new bylaws will generally cover

·    ensuring that the council meets its statutory obligation;

·    ensuring that effective operational practices on the control and enforcement of the new bylaws are implemented consistently across the region, and are made available to the general public;

·    ensuring that communications to the general public and other stakeholders are well planned and implemented in a timely manner;

·    developing and implementing standard business rules and processes that help achieve the council’s customer service standards;

·    ensuring that internal services are planned and delivered when needed, and are in alignment with other transformation initiatives;

·    putting any changes to fees in place; and

·    ensuring that staff are informed throughout the process and are trained on delivering the new services.

18.     The table below shows the current status of implementation projects.

 

Table 4: Summary of status and next steps for implementation projects

 

Implementation project name

Status and Progress

Link to bylaw topics / Other comments

 

Status

1-Preparation

2-Planning

3-Implementation

4-Closure

 

Underway

 

 

 

 

 

 

Alcohol licensing readiness

G

 

 

 

 

Completed

Alcohol licensing fees

G

 

 

 

 

See below

Animals (Stage 1)

G

 

 

 

 

Completed

Dog access review

G

 

 

 

 

 

Electoral Signs 2013

G

 

 

 

 

Completed

Electoral Signs 2014

G

 

 

 

 

 

Environmental

G

 

 

 

 

 

Facilities

G

 

 

 

 

 

Food safety

G

 

 

 

 

Completed

Health protection

G

 

 

 

 

Health & hygiene bylaw and code of practice; See below

Marine

G

 

 

 

 

 

Public safety & nuisance

G

 

 

 

 

 

Revoked bylaws

G

 

 

 

 

General admin; Offensive trades; Others

Signage

G

 

 

 

 

 

Stormwater

G

 

 

 

 

 

Street trading / Trading in public places

G

 

 

 

 

Trading in public places policy and bylaw

Waste management

G

 

 

 

 

Solid waste bylaw

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Proposed future

 

 

 

 

 

 

Air quality

B

 

 

 

 

 

Alcohol controls (liquor bans)

B

 

 

 

 

 

Animals (Stage 2)

B

 

 

 

 

 

Construction

B

 

 

 

 

 

Transport (AC land)

B

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 5: Additional comments for particular implementation projects

 

Alcohol licensing readiness

On track

G

The alcohol licensing project has now completed successfully. This project set out to ensure that the council was able to implement the requirements of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012, including the new licensing system and new fees that had to operate from 18 December 2013.

 

Alcohol licensing fees

On track

G

The Governing Body has resolved that the council adopt its own fees for licensed premises. This is provided for in the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012. The council can change the fee amounts, using the cost / risk fee categories that have been set by central government. Work is underway to capture actual information on costs, based on operating the new licensing system and the parts of those costs that can be recovered through licensing fees.

 

Health protection

On track

G

The Health protection project is implementing the new Health and hygiene bylaw and code of practice (which will come into force from 1 July 2014). A range of user-friendly brochures that summarise key provisions of the health protection code have been prepared to help communicate the requirements to all the people who operate these businesses.

 

A series of approaches are underway to help ensure operators are aware of the requirements to be followed. The new bylaw (with its risk-based approach) has resulted in some premises that are newly required to be registered, and the communication activities are focussed on these premises. Most of these will receive an individual visit, with an appropriate information pack.

 

There are also some premises that no longer need to be registered with the council, and this is also being communicated to them.

 

Funding for bylaw review and implementation

19.     The scope and scale of the expected changes mean that implementation requires significant effort and resources, and cost, for some topics. The Strategy and Finance committee made an initial provision for funding the IBRI programme at its meeting of 9 May 2013 (in part; refer item 16, SF/2013/67).

20.     As provided for in the resolution, a further investment proposal is being prepared for the 2015-2024 long-term plan. The programme continuously monitors its approach to each bylaw, and where possible captures any cost efficiencies and learnings for later bylaws.

 

Consideration

Local Board Views

21.     Local boards are involved in the review of each bylaw topic (consistent with the review’s principles). This report provides an update on the programme for local boards.

Maori Impact Statement

22.     This report does not raise any specific issues relating to Māori. The review of each topic includes considering whether that topic includes any elements of special interest to Māori, and if so the appropriate way to seek a greater level of engagement. Where appropriate, consultation with Māori (on a particular topic) may be linked to consultation on other related topics through the Unitary Plan or other initiatives.

General

23.     The recommendations in this report do not trigger the council’s policy on significance.

Implementation Issues

24.     Implementation issues are addressed as relevant to each topic, as noted above.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Background to bylaws

171

bView

Overview of the timeline for the programme

179

     

Signatories

Authors

Andrew Simon Pickering - Manager, Planning, Policies and Bylaws

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 

An introduction to Bylaws

 

 

Summary

1.       This attachment provides a brief introduction to bylaws and the process that is now underway to review the bylaws that were inherited by the Auckland Council from the former councils. It is being provided to local boards alongside their regular update report, as this is the first such update report since the 2013 local body elections.

2.       A bylaw is a rule or regulation made by a local authority, and it can therefore reflect both regional and local preferences. The Auckland Council inherited 158 bylaws across 32 broad topics from the former councils. These are referred to as “the legacy bylaws”. Most of these current bylaws must be reviewed by 31 October 2015.

3.       A review programme has been underway since 2010, focusing on the outcomes sought for each topic and how these outcomes apply to Auckland. It is taking into account legislative requirements (and timing due to central government’s legislative programme), identified council priorities and alignment with the council’s strategic vision, gaps (if any), other policy work and administrative improvements or cost reductions where possible. It will provide an opportunity for addressing inconsistencies from the various approaches adopted by the former councils, ultimately leading to a coherent and aligned set of Auckland Council bylaws. Not all legacy bylaws will be replaced with new bylaws.

4.       Auckland Council and Auckland Transport can both make bylaws within their particular areas of influence. Legislation also provides specific roles related to bylaws for local boards and Watercare Services Limited.

 

What are bylaws

5.       A bylaw is a rule or regulation made by a local authority, and can therefore reflect local preferences. This means they are an important tool for council as it seeks to deliver the agreed community outcomes and reflect community preferences.

6.       Most bylaws are made under the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA 2002) but other bylaws may be made under such acts or regulations as the Health Act, the Dog Control Act, the Burial and Cremation Act, the Prostitution Reform Act and the Transport Act. Bylaws may not over-ride legislation made by parliament and cannot generally require standards that are higher than those set nationally.

7.       Bylaws generally permit or regulate certain activities, require certain activities to be done in certain ways or prohibit certain activities. Bylaws may also license persons or property and set fees for certificates permits, licences, consents or inspections. In line with good regulatory practice, the LGA 2002 requires a local authority, before making a bylaw, to determine whether a bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing a perceived problem, and to ensure that the proposed bylaw is not inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act.

8.       The special consultative procedure under the LGA 2002 is used for making, amending, or revoking a bylaw. This requires the council to consider the views and preferences of people likely to be affected, or have an interest in a council decision. It must then publicly notify its proposal to make, amend or revoke a bylaw, outline in writing the reasons for such actions, invite and hear submissions and make deliberations in open meetings on its proposal. For some topics other legislation may modify or over ride some of these general requirements.

9.       Typically the Regulatory and Bylaws committee will receive and endorse each draft bylaw and statement of proposal (SOP), before it is approved by the governing body for public consultation.

 

Auckland Council and bylaws

10.     The Auckland Council originally inherited 158 bylaws from the former councils across 32 broad topics, and transitional legislation provided for these bylaws to remain operative in the former council areas until replaced or revoked. A number of different rules therefore operate across the region, and some of the local board areas have conflicting bylaw rules. Those conflicts must be resolved over time to support consistent governance and customer service.

11.     Auckland-specific legislation sets out particular roles within the bylaw process for local boards and Watercare Services Limited. These groups can perform actions that lead up to bylaw adoption, including proposing bylaws and leading public consultation on those bylaws.

12.     This legislation also makes most of the legacy bylaws expire on 31 October 2015. This means that the review of each topic and the implementation of any new bylaw or non-bylaw approach must be completed by that date.

13.     An outline of the bylaw topics is provided in appendix 2.

14.     Decisions on ten topics were made within the first term of the Auckland Council: Dog management; General administration; Offensive trades; Solid waste; Transport (roads); Food safety; Election signs; Health and hygiene; Public safety and nuisance; and Trade waste.

 

The programme of bylaw review and implementation

15.     The council has established a programme to review the legacy bylaws, and implement any resulting changes to its processes and service delivery. This alignment allows the council to achieve improvements in customer service and efficiencies in an ordered way. As one example, a new approach to food safety was implemented on 1 July 2013. This included a new harmonised approach to the A to E grading of food premises; harmonised fees; and harmonised set of requirements for training of those employed to prepare and sell food across Auckland café’s and restaurants and other food outlets.

16.     A set of eight principles were adopted in 2011 to guide the review. These are set out in appendix 1 and summarised below.

 

1)   Ensure that regulation by bylaw is appropriate

2)   Every bylaw should relate to a strategy or policy

3)   The regulatory framework should be accessible to users

4)   Bylaws should follow a consistent structure

5)   Local boards should be involved in the bylaw-making and review process

6)   Where a bylaw establishes a region-wide framework, it should also provide if appropriate a transparent and locally accountable procedure for making specific operating rules under delegated authority

7)   All bylaws should have a clear, practical and efficient approach to enforcement

8)   The bylaw-making or review process must include consideration of how administration, implementation, monitoring and review elements will be achieved

 

17.     Regular updates on the programme are provided to the Regulatory and Bylaws committee and to local boards.

 


Appendix 1: Principles to be reflected in the bylaw review

 

Principle

Comment

1 Ensure that regulation by bylaw is appropriate (Appropriate Mechanism)

The Local Government Act 2002 requires a local authority, before making a bylaw, to determine whether a bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing an objective. Alternatives such as education, self-regulation and advocacy for national standards or regulation should be considered.

Where regulation is appropriate, the right place for this must be determined. For example, a given topic may have been addressed in a bylaw by some of the former councils, and through district plan rules for others (e.g. signs).

2 Every bylaw should relate to a strategy or policy

(Strategic or Policy Alignment)

Bylaws should generally support (and be based on) a policy adopted by the council, e.g. a comprehensive street trading policy for activities such as outdoor dining, busking and events, should be in place before a bylaw is made to regulate such activities. In some cases the policy and the bylaw may be worked on in parallel.

3 The regulatory framework should be accessible to users

(Accessible to Users)

Regulatory requirements for a given activity may be located in a variety of places (e.g. bylaws, the district plan, the building code, codes of subdivision). Providing a carefully designed interface to these documents (and making links between them) will improve customer service and certainty.

4 Bylaws should follow a consistent structure

(Consistent Structure)

The use of a standard bylaw form (with appropriate customisation where necessary) is likely to make bylaws easier to use, and to reduce costs of ongoing maintenance.

5 Local boards should be involved in the bylaw-making and review process

(Local Board Engagement)

This will ensure that Local Boards are involved in development of policy, bylaws, specific rules and delegations that will either affect their local board area, or guide later Local Board decision-making under the adopted bylaw framework.

6 Where a bylaw establishes a region-wide framework, it should also provide if appropriate a transparent and locally accountable procedure for making specific operating rules under delegated authority

(Transparent and locally accountability)

This supports ongoing legislative compliance and provides for efficient decision-making where specific rules are determined pursuant to a bylaw (as opposed to being contained within a bylaw). It will also allow ample opportunity for local decision-making (by local boards or officers) without the need for governing body or committee scrutiny, where appropriate.

 

7 All bylaws should have a clear, practical and efficient approach to enforcement

(Enforceable)

Bylaws must be able to be enforced to be effective. Rules, and the enforcement approaches that can be used when these rules are breached need to be clear.

8 The bylaw-making or review process must include consideration of how administration, implementation, monitoring and review elements will be achieved

(Operational considerations)

Bylaws are typically put in place to address a particular issue or support a particular outcome. This is likely to be achieved in a more effective, efficient and transparent way if operational elements are considered through the policy and bylaw development process.

This would often include the process for making or review of any specific rules to give effect to, or that are required for, the administration of the bylaw, considering the level of delegation proposed, and the information needed to confirm that the bylaw has the intended effect.

This will ensure that bylaws are able to be enforced on commencement, and bylaw development will be viewed as part of a wider process.

 

Appendix 2: Topics covered by Auckland Council and Auckland Transport bylaws

 

Alcohol Control (Auckland Council)

Alcohol control bylaws allow councils to control the possession and consumption of alcohol in public places. This is commonly achieved by creating on-going alcohol controls (also called liquor bans) in specified public places over specified times so that it becomes an offence to consume, bring into or possess liquor in such public places at such times. The council is not able to apply a blanket ban to prevent alcohol being consumed in all or in large parts of its area.

 

Animals and Pests (Auckland Council)

These bylaws generally control the keeping of poultry, pigs, bees and cats and the slaughter of stock in urban areas and deal with stock wandering onto public places in rural areas.

 

Cemeteries (Auckland Council)

Cemetery and crematoria bylaws typically facilitate the management of cemeteries and crematoria under council’s control. They cover the sale of burial plots, reservation of areas for special purposes, provisions for internments, keeping graves and monuments in good order, the control of vehicles and the keeping of records.

 

Commercial sex industry including Brothels (Auckland Council)

The Prostitution Law Reform Act allows territorial authorities to make bylaws to prohibit or regulate signage visible from a public place that advertises commercial sexual services. The same act allows a territorial authority to make bylaws regulating the location of brothels.

 

Construction and development (Auckland Council and Auckland Transport)

Bylaws in these areas often work alongside the requirements of the Building Act. They may be used to protect public safety and amenity by controlling structures, materials and work in, on or over or adjacent (e.g. demolition) to public places. Bylaws may require street damage deposits and manage the construction and use of vehicle crossings. Bylaws may also regulate awnings, verahdahs and balconies over public places so that they meet minimum standards for safety and cleanliness.

 

Dogs (Auckland Council)

The council must have a dog policy, and the dog bylaw gives effect to this policy. The policy and bylaw must set out areas where dogs are prohibited, where they are required to be on-leash, where they can be off-leash and designated dog exercise areas. The Dog Control Act requires dog owners to be notified of proposed changes to the dog policy and dog control bylaw; these changes are co-ordinated where ever possible to minimise cost and simplify messages to owners.

 

Environmental Protection (Auckland Council)

Some councils use bylaws to control the use of outdoor lighting to prevent light spill and glare, whereas others would use district plan rules. Bylaws in this group may require premises to be kept in a clean, hygienic and tidy condition and may require burglar alarms to reset after sounding for a maximum of 15 minutes

 

Food safety (Auckland Council)

These bylaws regulate the sale of food and are complementary to the requirements of the Food Hygiene Regulations. These bylaws allow the closure of unhygienic premises, require staff working in food premises to have a minimum qualification in food hygiene and allow the grading of premises so that customers are informed about the cleanliness and conduct of premises selling food to the public. Provisions also apply to the sale of food from road side stalls so that the food is prepared and sold in a hygienic state.

 

Hazardous substances (Auckland Council)

Bylaws in this area may control the storage of hazardous substances and may also be used to ensure the safe storage of bulk liquids, so that any spillage may be safely contained to prevent water pollution.

 

Health and hygiene (Auckland Council)

These bylaws cover such activities as hair removal, piercing, tattooing, acupuncture to prevent the transmission of infectious diseases such as hepatitis B and HIV through inadequate hygiene practices or un-sterilised equipment. Bylaw provisions generally require the licensing of premises undertaking these activities, the adequate training of staff, sterilisation equipment and practices that reduce the risk of infection.

 

Hostels / boarding houses (Auckland Council)

Auckland City Council was the only council to have a bylaw controlling the standards of low cost accommodation such as hostels, guesthouses, rooming houses, boarding houses, motels and back packer accommodation. These are not licensed by other legislation and can suffer from poor conditions. This bylaw sets standards for safety, ventilation, sanitary conditions, maintenance and maximum occupancy.

 

Liquid and trade wastes (Auckland Council with Watercare Services Limited)

The Auckland Regional Council, Rodney, North Shore and Franklin had trade waste bylaws to regulate the discharge of wastes into sewage systems to prevent damage to those systems and or damage to sewage treatment plants. Watercare Services administers the trade waste bylaws.

 

Auckland City Council had a Waiheke Wastewater Bylaw to ensure the proper operation of septic tanks and other on-site wastewater disposal systems. Rodney, North Shore and Papakura had similar provisions for on-site wastewater disposal.

 

Navigation safety, wharves and marinas (Auckland Council and Auckland Transport)

Bylaws made under this subject matter include the Navigational Safety Bylaw which controls activities on the waters around the region. Provisions regulate the speed of vessels near the shore, near other vessels, around wharves and ramps, include requirements that anchored or moored vessels be seaworthy, and requirements around life jackets. Provisions regulate moorings and anchorages, place controls on water skiing, provide priority for large vessels within pilotage limits, and limit vessels carrying explosives and oil tankers etc.

 

Auckland City also had a bylaw which works in conjunction with the Auckland Regional Council Navigational Safety Bylaw to control the use of Orakei Basin so that there is a safe separation of powered and non-powered vessels using the basin. Some bylaws also cover wharves and marinas.

 

Public safety and nuisance / Street trading (Auckland Council and Auckland Transport)

Public places bylaws provide the ability to enforce general restrictions in public places (parks, reserves, squares, public footpaths and berms etc) to protect those public places from misuse and to protect the safety and amenity of those using such public places. Such bylaws may also cover street trading such as displays and café tables and public performances and events. They may also ban fireworks from certain areas and may also require property owners to exhibit street numbers so buildings are easily identified.

 

Recreational and cultural facilities (Auckland Council)

North Shore, Waitakere, Auckland and Manukau councils had bylaws regulating the use of libraries, swimming pools, art galleries, halls and recreation centres. Some or all of these activities may be able to be regulated by methods other than bylaws, such as, conditions of membership (libraries), conditions of entry (art galleries, recreational centres and pools) or contract (hall hire etc).

 

Rural fires / outdoor fires

Several councils adopted rural or outdoor fire bylaws to help manage risks related to these fires. These assist the rural fire service (which is managed by the council). The bylaw supports the issuing of fire permits and the fire ban process (in times of heightened risk).

 

Solid wastes (Auckland Council)

Solid waste bylaws typically regulate the collection of household (and some cases business) rubbish by council or their contractors. These bylaws may also licence waste collectors and set fees for the disposal of rubbish at council owned sites. The council can include provisions prohibiting placing junk mail into letterboxes which have stickers requesting “no junk mail” or similar. Solid waste bylaws may not be in conflict with the council’s waste management and minimisation plan.

 

Signs (Auckland Council and Auckland Transport)

These can cover signs such as sandwich boards, banners, ladder signs and real estate signs. Auckland City Council controlled the use of all types of advertising signs through a signs bylaw whereas other councils only used bylaws to control specific types of signs (e.g. temporary signs) and used district plan rules to control other types of signs. Specific rules apply to election signs (usually in a separate bylaw).

 

Stormwater management (Auckland Council)

Auckland City and Papakura District had stormwater management bylaws to manage open watercourses and pipes that are used to discharge stormwater to the coast. These bylaws generally require landowners to keep watercourses free from obstruction so they function correctly for stormwater transport. They also support the ongoing use of stormwater soakage in some volcanic parts of Auckland.

 

Traffic (Auckland Council and Auckland Transport)

Traffic bylaws regulate matters such as one-way roads, roads with weight restrictions, speed limits, the stopping, loading and parking of motor vehicles, bus lanes, cycle paths and shared zones which are not regulated by central government. A traffic bylaw may also address the driving of vehicles on beaches, and controls on specific areas such as the Auckland Domain. Auckland Transport is now responsible for bylaws relating to the Auckland transport system (including roads), with the council responsible for other areas such as roads within parks.

 

Water supply (Auckland Council with Watercare Services Limited)

Most of the amalgamated councils had water supply bylaws. These cover topics including metering, connection, protection of the supply from contamination, water conservation, provision for fire fighting, and use of water from hydrants.



Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 



Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 

Local Board Capital Transport Fund

 

File No.: CP2014/09208

 

  

Purpose

1.       To provide a list of Local Board Capital Transport Fund (LBCTF) priority projects to Auckland Transport (AT) that the Rodney Local Board would like to progress.  The Rodney Local Board has previously resolved to allocate funds from the 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 LBCTF budgets for a number of transport projects within the local board area.

Executive summary

2.       The Strategy and Finance Committee at its meeting on 2 August 2012 resolved that $10 million per annum of AT capital funding be allocated to local boards on a population basis of respective local board areas.  The Rodney Local Board receives $369,261 per annum from this capital allocation to use on local projects it selects.

3.       The Rodney Local Board, at its June 2013 meeting (RD/2013/161) confirmed funding allocations to a number of projects.  The projects which returned Firm Estimates of Cost (FEC) no greater than the original Rough Order of Cost (ROC) were progressed to detailed design and confirmed for construction.

4.       A number of projects which returned a greater FEC have been reconsidered by the Transport Portfolio.  Some of these can be progressed due to the availability of LBCTF 2014-2015 funding.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a)      approve for construction the following three projects:

i)        Puhoi Pedestrian Bridge (Reference number 113) $170,000.

ii)       Footpath, Point Wells Rd 1.8m wide on the berm from Waimanu Place to approximately No. 30/32 Point Wells Rd (Reference number 205) $53,000, subject to consultation with affected residents.

iii)      Footpath, 1.8 m wide on western side Oaia Rd (Reference number 163) from Waitea Rd to the distance that $95,000 will allow (estimating 225m).

b)      request Auckland Transport to provide a Rough Order of Cost for retaining work to be undertaken as a minimum opposite 95 Mahurangi East Rd (Reference number 116) and determine if a safe space for walkers could be provided to use when traffic is passing.

c)      agree in principle to provide funding of $20,000 from the Local Board Capital Transport Fund to investigate a public/private partnership approach to sealing Pukapuka Rd subject to Auckland Transport’s agreement  to consider supporting this proposal.

 

Comments

 

5.       The Strategy and Finance Committee at its meeting on 2 August 2012 resolved that $10 million per annum of AT capital funding be allocated to local boards on a population basis of respective local board areas. The exceptions are the Great Barrier Local Board and Waiheke Local Board, whose allocation will be one percent and two percent of the annual fund respectively, as allocating on a purely population basis would have resulted in a negligible level of funding for these local boards.

6.       The Rodney Local Board receives $369,261 per annum from this capital allocation to use on local projects it selects.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

7.       The Rodney Local Board Transport Committee (in the previous electoral term) requested information from Auckland Transport regarding a number of projects.  Transport Committee Members considered the ROCs provided and decided to seek information on a further list of footpath projects.  Following receipt of indicative costs for those extra projects and discussion in regard to prioritising, a decision was made to recommend that the Rodney Local Board approve selected projects.

8.       The Rodney Local Board resolved (RD/2013/161) at its June 2013 meeting that the following projects progress to detailed design and construction:

Ref No.

Project

Approved Budget

 

113

Puhoi Pedestrian Bridge (Cnr Puhoi Rd & Krippner Rd in Puhoi Village

$90,000

 

115A

205*

Point Wells edging restraint (subject to discussion with the Road Maintenance team and possible works already scheduled)

$50,000

 

116

Kerb, Channel and footpath opposite 96 Mahurangi East Rd, Snells Beach joining the existing footpath with Arabella Lane

$135,000

 

118

Mountable Kerb adjacent to 336 Mahurangi East Rd, Snells Beach

$10,000

 

162

Footpath from Puhoi Library to Krippner Rd bridge (using Puhoi Design Guide to inform)

$31,000

 

174

Fordyce Rd, Parakai footpath extension

$7,000

 

Total projects approved for 2012/2013

$323,000

Contingency (unspent budget)

$46,261

 

*Note this project reference number has changed in light of the project scope being extended.

9.       At its August 2013 meeting the Rodney Local Board resolved (RD/2013/220) that the following additional projects were progressed to detailed design:

No.

Project

Approved Budget

161

New footpath Waitoki Rd, W aitoki

$55,000

163

New Footpath Oaia Rd, Muriwai – north of Waitea Rd, eastern side

$95,000

175

Local access road improvements,  338-382 Main Rd, Huapai

$148,000

177

New footpath Coatesville Riverhead Highway, eastern side from Elliot St to bridge

$39,000

180

New footpath Mahoenui Valley Rd opposite the school to intersection of Coatesville Riverhead Highway

$31,000

190

New footpath Rodney St, Wellsford

$6,000

179

Extend loose chip footpath on the northern side of Coatesville Riverhead Highway from Glenmore Rd to 250 Coatesville Riverhead Highway.

$36,000

Total capital programme approved for the balance of 2012/2013 and 2013/2014

$410,000

Budget unspent

$5,522

 

10.     AT were asked to report back to the local board if any of the projects were likely to exceed the budget allocated.

11.     At its April 2014 meeting the Rodney Local Board confirmed approval for three projects which had tender prices returned in excess of the firm cost estimates previously approved by the local board.  These projects were:

No.

Project

Approved FEC

Tender Price

Variation

177

New footpath Coatesville Riverhead Highway, eastern side from Elliot St to bridge

$39,000

$41,000

+$2,000

179

Extend loose chip footpath on the northern side of Coatesville Riverhead Highway from Glenmore Rd to 250 Coatesville Riverhead Highway.

$36,000

$30,000

-$6,000

180

New footpath Mahoenui Valley Rd opposite the school to intersection of Coatesville Riverhead Highway

$31,000

$40,000

+$9,000

Totals

$106,000

$111,000

$5,000

 

12.     Puhoi Pedestrian Bridge: AT has provided a new FEC for the Puhoi pedestrian bridge (Ref 113) of $170,000.  Members of the Rodney Local Board Transport Portfolio considered this and support the project going ahead, together with the previously approved footpath from Puhoi Library to Krippner Rd bridge (Ref 162) in accordance with the Puhoi Design Guide.  Members also requested that AT assist with any related safety aspects to contribute to funding the pedestrian bridge project.

13.     Pt Wells Footpath: New information was also provided on the footpath project at Point Wells (Ref 205) and members of the Transport Portfolio support the construction of an off-road 1.8m footpath from Waimanu Place to approximately 30/32 Pt Wells Rd with a ROC of $53,000 subject to satisfactory consultation with affected residents.

14.     Oaia Road Footpath: A new ROC was provided for a 1.8m footpath on the western side of Oaia Road from Waitea Road to the distance that the previously allocated $95,000 will allow, estimating this to be 225 metres.  Members of the Transport Portfolio considered this and support the project going ahead.  Members also requested that AT approach AC Stormwater department to contribute as appropriate.

15.     Mahurangi East Road: The project at Mahurangi East Road to connect to Arabella Lane was considered by members of the Transport Portfolio in light of the new estimate provided at $300,000.  Due to the high cost, members have requested AT provide a ROC for retaining work to be undertaken to determine if it would be possible to create a safe space for walkers when traffic is passing.

16.     Pukapuka Road: At its April 2014 meeting the Rodney Local Board received a deputation from Tony Mair, a resident of Pukapuka Road, Mahurangi West.  Mr Mair indicated he had support of other residents to partially fund the sealing of 3.8kms of Pukapuka Road.  Mr Mair noted that he and other residents proposed funding approximately 80% of the cost, providing the local board and AT also contributed to the work, citing design, consent and safety improvement costs as the appropriate contribution.  The proposal included a non-standard width and flexibility in regard to construction timing. 

17.     Members of the Transport Portfolio indicated their support for the proposal and recommended a contribution of $20,000 from the LBCTF to pursue this as a possible public/private partnership venture.

Maori impact statement

18.     No specific issues with regard to the Maori Impact Statement are triggered by this report.

 

Implementation

19.     AT are requested to report monthly to the Transport Portfolio on progress of LBCTF projects.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Authors

Michelle Sanderson – Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 

Rodney Local Board Final Feedback on the Local Boards Funding Policy

 

File No.: CP2014/09073

 

  

Purpose

1.       To provide the final version of the Rodney Local Board feedback on the Local Boards Funding Policy.

Executive summary

2.       At its business meeting on Monday, 14 April the local board considered a report on Local Boards Funding Policy. The resolution adopted (resolution number RD/2014/73) provided delegation to Members Steele and Pirrie (resolution (q)) to make further amendments to the feedback.

3.       Attached for information is the Rodney Local Board’s final feedback on the Local Boards Funding Policy. The order of some of the resolutions has altered and some of wording has been altered, this has aligned the feedback with that of the Franklin Local Board, the only other rural local board within the Auckland region.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a)      accept the local board’s final feedback on the Local Boards Funding Policy as attached as Attachment A to the agenda report.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Rodney Local Board final feedback on the Local Boards Funding Policy

187

     

Signatories

Authors

Raewyn Morrison - Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 



Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 

Rodney and Hibiscus Coast Subdivision Local Board Funding Subcommittee

 

File No.: CP2014/08618

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The Northern Joint Funding Committee met on 2 May 2014 and resolved to set up two sub-committees to allocate the funding of the legacy Rodney District Council and North Shore City Council. For the purpose of allocating the funding of the legacy Rodney District Council the Rodney Local Board and the Hibiscus Coast Subdivision of the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board has been established. The Rodney and Hibiscus Coast Subdivision Local Board Funding Subcommittee will comprise two members from the Rodney Local Board area and two members from the Hibiscus Coast Subdivision of the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area. Alternates to the subcommittee will also be appointed from each local board.

Executive Summary

2.       The subcommittee arrangements and the responsibilities of each subcommittee are largely the same as the previous term.

3.       At the meeting held on 2 May 2014, the Northern Joint Funding Committee resolved that the Rodney and Hibiscus Coast Subdivision Local Board Funding Subcommittee consist of two members of the Rodney Local Board being appointed at a later date by the Rodney Local Board as well as alternative members and two members of the Hibiscus Coast subdivision of the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board to be appointed at a later day by the Hibiscus and Bays local Board as well as alternative members.

4.       The Northern Joint Funding Committee delegated to the Rodney and Hibiscus Coast Subdivision Local Board Funding Subcommittee all responsibilities as required under the Northern Joint Funding Committee’s terms of reference (Attachment A).

 

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a)      confirms Members Steele and Houlbrooke to the Rodney and Hibiscus Coast Subdivision Local Board Funding Subcommittee to determine the Rodney District Council legacy funding applications to the Large Grants Fund (community), Large Grants Fund (recreation), Large Grants Fund (youth), Community Grants Scheme, Small Grants Fund (youth), Rodney Natural Heritage Fund and Rodney Heritage Item Assistance Fund, as delegated by the Northern Joint Funding Committee.

b)      confirms Member Colville as an alternate member of the Rodney and Hibiscus Coast Subdivision Local Board Funding Subcommittee.

 

 

Discussion

5.       The Northern Joint Funding Committee at its meeting on 2 May 2014 appointed two local board members from each of the Rodney Local Board and the Hibiscus Coast Subdivision of the Hibiscus and Bays Local Boards to the Rodney and Hibiscus Coast Subdivision Local Board Funding Subcommittee. Confirmation of these appointments is sought.

Consideration

Local Board Views

6.       The Northern Joint Funding Committee has appointed two local board members from each of the Rodney Local Board and the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board to the Rodney and Hibiscus Coast Subdivision Local Board Funding Subcommittee. The local boards need to resolve on the membership of the subcommittee.

Maori Impact Statement

7.       No consultation with Maori has been undertaken. No specific benefits or risks to Maori communities have been identified.

Implementation Issues

8.       Once the Rodney Local Board and the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Members are confirmed the Rodney and Hibiscus Coast Subdivision Local Board Funding Subcommittee meeting date will be set to consider the applications.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Terms of Reference for the Northern Joint Funding Committee

191

    

Signatories

Authors

Raewyn Morrison - Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 




Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 

Communications and Engagement Portfolio

 

File No.: CP2014/09054

 

  

Purpose

1.       For the Rodney Local Board to consider amending the Communications and Engagement Portfolio leads.

Executive summary

2.       The current Communications and Engagement Portfolio has Member Pirrie as the lead with Member Houlbrooke as the alternate. Members Pirrie and Houlbrooke consider that it would be more appropriate for them both to be the lead with Member Pirrie as the representative from the south and Member Houlbrooke from the north.

3.       Should the local board agree to this request the Portfolio Holders list will be updated accordingly.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a)      appoint Member Beth Houlbrooke (northern area) as an additional lead to the Communications and Engagement Portfolio along with Member Phelan Pirrie (southern area).

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Authors

Raewyn Morrison - Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 

Urgent Decision of Local Board: Transport Capital Funding

 

File No.: CP2014/09172

 

  

Purpose

1.       To acknowledge a decision made under urgency by the Rodney Local Board in December 2013.

Executive summary

2.       It has recently come to the attention of local board staff that a decision made under urgency in December 2013 in regard to the Transport Capital Fund has not been included in a subsequent agenda of the Rodney Local Board.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a)      acknowledge the decision made under urgency on 11 December 2013 in regard to the Transport Capital Fund.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Decision under urgency: Transport Capital Fund

199

     

Signatories

Authors

Raewyn Morrison - Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 




Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 

Deputation/Public Forum Update

 

File No.: CP2014/08802

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       As part of its business meetings Rodney Local Board has a period of time set aside for Deputations/Presentations and Public Forum during which time members of the public can address the Local Board on matters within its delegated authority.

Executive Summary

2.       Under Standing Orders there is provision for Deputations/Presentations to the Local Board. Applications for Deputations/Presentations must be in writing setting forth the subject and be received by the Relationship Manager at least seven working days before the meeting concerned, and subsequently have been approved by the Chairperson. Unless the meeting determines otherwise in any particular case, a limit of ten minutes is placed on the speaker making the presentation.

3.       Standing Orders allows three minutes for speakers in Public Forum.

4.       Requests, matters arising and actions from the Deputations/Presentations and Public Forum are recorded and updated accordingly. The Rodney Local Board Deputations/Presentations and Public Forum Update is attached as Attachment A.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a)      receive the Deputation/Public Forum Update.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Public Forum/Deputation Update

205

    

Signatories

Authors

Raewyn Morrison - Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 

Rodney Local Board Workshop Records

 

File No.: CP2014/08801

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       Attached are the Rodney Local Board workshop records of 7 and 28 April 2014.

Executive Summary

2.       The Rodney Local Board holds regular workshops. Attached for information are the records of the most recent workshop meetings.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a)      Workshop records for 7 and 28 April 2014 be accepted.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Workshop Record 4 April 2014

209

bView

Workshop Record 28 April 2014

211

    

Signatories

Authors

Raewyn Morrison - Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

 


Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014

 

 



Rodney Local Board

12 May 2014